Quote
NathanA
Marion,

As you can see, most people on this forum are ex-Trinity members who are disgruntled and claim that Trinity is a cult. I and one other Trinity member are the only people on this forum who have disagreed, the moderator of this forum has also questioned the accusations made here. I counsel you to talk to people on both sides of this issue, those who are current members of TFI, and other media sources.

Just don't believe everything people are saying here without honestly searching out both sides. These people express one side of the totality of views concerning the nature of TFI. Don't give in to the pressure here to just accept what is being said. Ask both sides the hardest questions you know.

From my perspective, Ole Anthony is the farthest thing from a persuasive personality there is. Most people don't agree with him. He is not a charming narcissist, but a raw man who will say exactly what he thinks to your face, and tell you not to accept what he says, but to search things out for yourself.

Consider that the Observer article is the only article of many that has ever put TFI in such a negative light.

Good Luck Marion,

Nathan

We may be disgruntled ex-members, but we are telling the truth. I am glad, Marion, you have the integrity to read the book. Nathan says to check out both sides, but that is the very thing he himself has been unwilling to do, even though he has been offered a free book.

Nathan, I am disappointed in you. I thought you were making progress, but this seems like a regression. I am especially saddened by your lack of response to the touching post by Boanerges. I know it actually cost him something to write that, and yet you express yourself in a way that suggests that you see this all as some intellectual curiosity. These are real people whose lives have been damaged by the group you continue to defend, even though you have no real basis for doing so.

I now think Boanerges is right--you should go and live at Trinity in Dallas for awhile and see for yourself what is going on there. It is pretty clear that we are wasting our keystrokes talking to you in this forum.

Quote

As you can see, most people on this forum are ex-Trinity members who are disgruntled and claim that Trinity is a cult.

And, the one giant question in the universe that neither you nor anyone at Trinity (including their designated spokesman, John "Grima Wormtongue" R) wants to address is, "WHY DO PRACTICALLY ALL OF THE FORMER MEMBERS OF TRINITY FOUNDATION THINK IT'S A CULT?"

Quote
counselor47

Quote
NathanA
Marion,

As you can see, most people on this forum are ex-Trinity members who are disgruntled and claim that Trinity is a cult. I and one other Trinity member are the only people on this forum who have disagreed, the moderator of this forum has also questioned the accusations made here. I counsel you to talk to people on both sides of this issue, those who are current members of TFI, and other media sources.

Just don't believe everything people are saying here without honestly searching out both sides. These people express one side of the totality of views concerning the nature of TFI. Don't give in to the pressure here to just accept what is being said. Ask both sides the hardest questions you know.

From my perspective, Ole Anthony is the farthest thing from a persuasive personality there is. Most people don't agree with him. He is not a charming narcissist, but a raw man who will say exactly what he thinks to your face, and tell you not to accept what he says, but to search things out for yourself.

Consider that the Observer article is the only article of many that has ever put TFI in such a negative light.

Good Luck Marion,

Nathan

We may be disgruntled ex-members, but we are telling the truth. I am glad, Marion, you have the integrity to read the book. Nathan says to check out both sides, but that is the very thing he himself has been unwilling to do, even though he has been offered a free book.

Nathan, I am disappointed in you. I thought you were making progress, but this seems like a regression. I am especially saddened by your lack of response to the touching post by Boanerges. I know it actually cost him something to write that, and yet you express yourself in a way that suggests that you see this all as some intellectual curiosity. These are real people whose lives have been damaged by the group you continue to defend, even though you have no real basis for doing so.

I now think Boanerges is right--you should go and live at Trinity in Dallas for awhile and see for yourself what is going on there. It is pretty clear that we are wasting our keystrokes talking to you in this forum.

Nathan, who are you and why do you bother with participating here if you are not willing to review the evidence for yourself? Once again: please, you have nothing to contribute to the discussion and only frustrate us and try to distract the conversation. Read the book and then come back. counselor47 is right. How could you tell Marion to review everything carefully and judge for herself when you refuse to do the same? You are ridiculous. It's like you can't be reasoned with. Please, go away.

You are simply an annoyance, Nathan. You cannot be reasoned with and are here to troll, whether you realize it or not. I have contacted the moderator in an effort to get you dealt with and/or banned. You know exactly what you are doing, and I for one do not appreciate it. Quit playing games and get serious.

zeuszor:

I don't think it would be appropriate to ban anyone at this thread at this time.

But a warining.

Everyone should be reasonable and allow for differing opinions, without name calling/flaming.

Ole Anthony has been around for a long time. People have different opinions regarding him and his ministry.

There has been good press about Anthony and recently some bad press.

There are respected, credible people taking positions both pro and con regarding Anthony and the Trinity Foundation.

IMO--before criticizing any book publicly it would seem reasonable to read it, or at least substantial excerpted material from it. And then to be very specific about what is wrong or misleading about that book.

It is helpful to anyone reading this thread that the discussion here is focused, specific and that points are made and explained succintly.

NathanA simply wants to argue and naively defend TFI, but refuses to accept a free book, read it, and then come back to the discussion. He refuses to examine the evidence we present. He will not listen to reason. He simply dismisses the claims wholesale and pretty much calls us liars and unbelievers. He cannot (or will not) answer simple questions put out by myself and counselor47. He simply wants to come back every day and childishly argue. It's been going on for weeks now and it's really annoying. I am sick of it!

zeuszor:

Nathan's auto approve has been removed.

I will be watching his posts.

Thanks.

There was a story in my country, South Africa, recently that blew me away. A pathologist put the cause of death of a person as AIDS. Now, he has been charged and slapped with a law suit for doing that. Not allowed! It's taboo.Yet everyone knows the the problem is huge. But no one wants to admit it.

I couldn't believe it.

Nathan's approach to TFI, and his insistence on not reading the book, is, to me, a parallel to that kind of approach. He argues the case back and forth, but won't read the book, even though he knows it is there. He will only look at part of the evidence, knowing full well that there is a strong source directly pertaining to the subject.

He's fooling himself if he dismisses the input from everyone on this thread. He's also questioning the excellent coverage by the Dallas Observer if he reads it and chooses not to read Wendy's book. The words "cognitive dissonance" spring to mind. It seems Nathan has to justify many things without his choices making much sense.

Let me use another metaphor. It's like an ostrich that sees a hyena approaching and puts its head in the ground. Now that it cannot see the hyena it feels safe. Riiiggghhhttt.

Same thing, Nathan. That's how it appears you approach the evidence about Trinity.

Wow....I personally agree with Nathan but I agree that he should go ahead and read the book to understand both sides of the story. What others here should be ashamed about is that fact that Seeking is in the exact same boat as Nathan BUT he/she is on the other side of the tracks and apparantly that makes it "okay".

I've asked the moderator to moderate Seekings as well since he/she has ONLY read the book yet have never been to a bible study or ever been to Trinity and has argued, trolled, etc.. one side of the picture without ever seeing for themselves what they feel about Trinity.

As for the article. The woman who wrote it NEVER put in over 8 other interviews from members and ex-members because they had nothing against Trinity. The Observer wanted a contraversal piece and the reporter succeeded in that by putting the negatives instead of the positives.

As for that 'burning' question about why the ex-members believe Trinity is a cult. Well, perhaps it is becuase you have only what?....15 disgruntled members out of 45+ ex-members? Why didn't Wendy interview those that "are on the fringe", that have left on good terms or those that have visited but have nothing bad to say. Why?? Because she was trying to sell a book about a Dallas Cult and it wouldn't have been prudent for her to put in anything positive about Trinity.

Was Ole an ass at times wayyyy back then for some people.. Sure. I want to ask a VERY important question to Counselor. Do you think Ole may have mellowed out and changed in the last 8 YEARS. Can "cult" leaders change?